Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

BECKER v. BISHOP et al.

CARLEY, Judge.

Plaintiff appeals from an order setting aside a previously entered default judgment and granting defendant's motion for a new trial. The order allowed defendant to answer, counterclaim and proceed to trial as soon as possible and the effect is to continue the pendency of the case in the trial court. The judgment is not final as contemplated by Code Ann. § 6-701 (a) 1 (Ga. L. 1965, p. 18; 1968, pp. 1072, 1073; 1975, pp. 757, 758). The judgment was not final and is not of the type from which direct appeal may be taken pursuant to Code Ann. § 6-701 (a) 3. An interlocutory appeal is cognizable only if the trial judge issues a certificate of immediate review pursuant to Code Ann. § 6-701 (a) 2 (A) and the appellate court grants permission for direct appeal pursuant to an application filed in accordance with the provisions of Code Ann. § 6-701 (a) 2 (B). Since plaintiff neither obtained a certificate of immediate review nor applied to this court for permission for direct appeal, the appeal is premature and must be dismissed. Notrica v. Southern Bell Tel. c. Co., 147 Ga. App. 737 ( 250 S.E.2d 196) (1978); First Nat. Bank v. Hudson, 139 Ga. App. 629 ( 229 S.E.2d 109) (1976); Bouldin v. Mote, 136 Ga. App. 73 ( 220 S.E.2d 79) (1975).

Appeal dismissed. Deen, C. J., and Shulman, J., concur.

CARLEY, Judge.

ARGUED JULY 2, 1979 — DECIDED SEPTEMBER 5, 1979.
Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

BECKER v. BISHOP
(Sep 5, 1979)